Remington's new compact 380 - RM-380

123

Remington is releasing a new compact 380, the RM-380. Not sure why they made it a tilt-barrel lockup instead of direct blow-back like most 380's. I like it, but I think I'll be happy with my stable of 380's already acquired.

The "manual safety" is the long DAO trigger-pull. Every trigger pull is DA so it has to be intentional to get the hammer to cock.

No, the DAO pull is not the "safety". A "safety" is there to help mental disorder associated with a persons low confidence level in themself to be safe with a pistol. Even if all they do is put a little flipper thing on the frame that blocks the trigger and nothing else people feel more "safe" all the safety on my P22 does is stop the hammer from hitting the firing pin, and people think it is a "safety", it helps relieve that mental disorder they have. You could put 20 flipper things on the slide and frame and it will be just as unsafe in an unsafe persons hands. People use the term "safety" too loosely. All the safety the 1911 needs is the grip safety, as it was originally designed. The HS2000 design has proven it many decades later. It is a fully cocked SA striker fired grip safety weapon and is plenty safe. People see that cocked hammer and freak the eff out thinking they need that "safety" to be safe. I also like the 1911s original slide stop lever. The lack of a shelf on it clearly displays it was never intended to be used to charge an empty chamber pistol, much like the Glock slide stop.

Not a bad looking little gun, but I'm happy with the G42. I think there are a couple different .380s I'd like to have now just for the safe, but I really don't like these little micro-pistols. They hurt!

For me, the two most iconic .380 pistols are the PPK and the Beretta 84F Cheetah, which is the best looking one of all, in my opinion. It is the quinessential office gun. LOL!

Yea, besides that guy who has to restate the obvious, the gun looks a little small to be used with a snappy .380ACP. Considering the original design was for 9mm, hence the tilt-barrel lockup instead of direct blow-back, I've never liked guns that use a two-finger hold on the grip. I read one review of the fore-runner and the first thing the guy did was add a Pearce grip extension from another single-stack magazine to make the grip more accommodating to his hands.

...All the safety the 1911 needs is the grip safety, as it was originally designed...

The grip-safety-only, pre-M1911 Browning/Colt was intended for the US cavalry, and was intended to be carried in "condition two." When the trooper was to access his pistol, he was supposed to thumb-cock it as he drew it from his holster.
That turned out to be rather unsafe, particularly on horseback, so Browning added the "half-cock" notch, intended to catch a hammer that had slipped out from beneath the trooper's thumb. That didn't work out either.
The final design added the safety lever that we all know and love. Its beauty lies in the way that it traps the sear tightly against the hammer, making an unintended discharge almost impossible when the pistol is properly handled.

The grip safety of the M1911 and M1911A1 only interferes with the movement of the trigger and its yoke, but it does nothing to immobilize the pistol's hammer. The hammer can still be easily jarred off of the sear's nose. (I've seen it happen.)
Thus, the safety lever is an important part of the pistol's mechanism, since it really does immobilize both the sear and the hammer. To create an unintended discharge in a safed, properly handled 1911, the sear itself, or the hammer's notch, would have to fail and fracture. This is extremely unlikely.

Carrying a 1911 in "condition one," but with its safety "off" (or missing) and depending only upon its grip safety, is therefore quite dangerous, and bespeaks either a misuse, or a lack, of the "universal safety mechanism" we all should have in our heads, right between our ears.